Arizona

Abortion rights will be on the AZ ballot after Supreme Court rejects challenge from foes

Published

1 year ago

August 20, 2024

Abortion rights will be on the AZ ballot after Supreme Court rejects challenge from foes

Arizona voters will have the final say on whether abortion should be a right in the Grand Canyon State in November after the Arizona Supreme Court shot down a last-chance attempt from abortion foes to prevent the question from appearing on the ballot.

Dawn Penich, a spokeswoman for the campaign behind the abortion rights initiative, celebrated the court’s action as a victory for the ability of Arizona voters to make their voices heard.

“This win means that Arizona voters will get to have our say and enshrine the right to access abortion in our state constitution, putting personal medical decisions where they belong: in the hands of patients and doctors once and for all,” she said in a written statement.

Arizona Right to Life sought to invalidate all of the signature petitions gathered by the Arizona Abortion Access Act, arguing that it illegally deceived voters into signing their names. The anti-abortion organization, along with other prominent anti-abortion groups, formed part of a Decline to Sign campaign that unsuccessfully attempted to convince voters not to support the initiative’s bid to appear on the ballot.

The campaign behind Proposition 139 collected a record-breaking number of signatures to qualify for the November ballot, and just under 578,000 were confirmed to be valid last week — far exceeding the 383,923 requirement for a proposal that amends the Arizona Constitution.

In court, Arizona Right to Life argued that a 200-word summary of the ballot measure shown to voters by petition circulators asking for their signatures was so unlawfully misleading that the only recourse left was to throw out all of the signature sheets. A key complaint from the group was that the summary didn’t explain that the initiative has the potential to invalidate several existing abortion laws, including the 15-week gestational ban currently in place.

The act guarantees access to an abortion up to the point of fetal viability, generally regarded as being around 24 weeks, and includes exceptions beyond that timeframe if a health care provider deems the procedure is necessary to preserve a woman’s life, physical or mental health. It also prohibits any state law from denying, interfering or restricting a woman’s right to obtain an abortion unless the state has a compelling interest in doing so that is rooted in evidence-based decision-making and doesn’t infringe on a woman’s autonomy.

Arizona Right to Life’s argument failed to convince a Maricopa County Superior Court Judge, who ruled earlier this month that the summary is perfectly accurate and the group’s criticisms of how the campaign has described the act should be aired in the political arena. On Tuesday, the Arizona Supreme Court sided with the lower court, saying that the summary complies with state law. All seven justices unanimously ordered that the initiative be included in the November ballot.

In a five-page ruling, Chief Justice Ann Scott Timmer wrote that the initiative’s 200-word summary adequately outlined its “principal provisions,” as required by Arizona law. Those provisions, according to the justices, are that the Arizona Abortion Access Act establishes a fundamental right to abortion; it guarantees the right to obtain an abortion up to and after fetal viability; and it prevents the state from punishing someone who assists a woman in receiving an abortion.

The complaint from Arizona Right to Life that the summary made no mention of how the initiative interacts with existing state law is irrelevant, Timmer wrote, because state law doesn’t require that the summary include such an explanation. And, she added, it’s unnecessary, because most Arizonans would understand the initiative’s effects without having to be told about them.

“The description is not required to explain the Initiative’s impact on existing abortion laws or regulations,” Timmer wrote. “Moreover, a reasonable person would necessarily understand that existing laws that fail the prescribed tests would be invalid rather than continue in effect.”

Another argument advanced by Arizona Right to Life was that the summary left out the fact that the health care provider mentioned in the initiative who has the ability to authorize an abortion even after fetal viability can include an abortion provider. Attorneys for the group said that could open the door to bad faith judgements, because abortion providers directly benefit from providing abortions, and argued that including that detail in the 200-word summary could have convinced some voters not to add their names to signature petition sheets.

But the high court dismissed that argument, too, with Timmer writing that most Arizonans assume that “health care provider” includes whichever “treating physician” a woman is consulting. And, she added, most voters recognize that health care providers are guided by ethical codes and act in good faith to safeguard their patient’s health.

In the end, the complaints brought by Arizona Right to Life don’t meet the threshold to bar the abortion rights proposal from the ballot. In fact, most of the group’s criticisms, Timmer wrote, are best dealt with in the political sphere, through advocacy and public opposition.

Source link

Click to comment

Arizona

Following scandal, this Oregon sewer board will move its subsidiary from Hawaii to Arizona

Published

7 hours ago

November 19, 2025

Press Room

Following scandal, this Oregon sewer board will move its subsidiary from Hawaii to Arizona

It’s official: Washington County’s embattled sewer agency will trade Hawaiian beaches for Arizona desert by the end of 2026.

In a move that had been telegraphed for months, the Clean Water Services board of commissioners voted 4-0 Tuesday to relocate its controversy-producing insurance subsidiary from Hawaii to Arizona, citing financial savings. The vote comes eight months after the company’s location came under scrutiny in the wake of an Oregonian/OregonLive investigation that found that agency executives on the insurance company board stayed at a rotating cast of five-star resorts for annual board meetings and insurance conferences in Hawaii.

Seven trips cost at least $165,000, including $42,000 to send six officials to the Big Island in 2023 and at least $41,000 to send seven officials to Kauai last year, records show. The sewer agency did not send any employees to Hawaii last month for the annual insurance conference.

Following the newsroom’s investigation, the sewer board, made up of the members of the Washington County Board of Commissioners, implemented a slew of oversight measures and the agency’s executive director eventually resigned, privately citing a hostile work environment. The board’s review included requiring the agency to conduct a new domicile review for its wholly-owned captive insurance company, a form of self insurance that is rare among public agencies.

That review, conducted this summer by consultant Aon, identified Arizona, not Hawaii, as the best state for Clean Water Services to locate its insurance subsidiary. The agency endorsed that recommendation and asked the board to approve it, primarily based on Aon’s review, spokesperson Julie Cortez said.

The sewer board did not make public statements before voting Tuesday but asserted in previous meetings and in its official board resolution that the decision to relocate the insurance company from Hawaii to Arizona made financial sense and was not simply a response to public outcry. However, Clean Water Services declined to provide a complete picture of why the move made financial sense.

The Clean Water Services board, made up of the Washington County Board of Commissioners, voted 4-0 on Tuesday to move the agency’s insurance subsidiary from Hawaii to Arizona. Director Jerry Willey was not present for the vote. Mark Graves/The Oregonian

An August estimate by Aon found it would cost the agency about $203,000 annually to remain in Hawaii while it would cost nearly $192,000 to be in Arizona.

That analysis factored in board member travel. Aon estimated it would cost only $10,000 to continue traveling to Hawaii for annual board meetings and up to $16,500 for optional training and education. In comparison, it estimated it would cost $7,500 to go to Arizona annually for board meetings and up to $9,500 for optional training and education.

Those figures are well below the more $40,000 annually that the agency had been spending in recent years to send its entire board to Hawaii. Rick Shanley, the interim CEO/general manager for Clean Water Services, told the board in an Oct. 10 meeting that was because the agency would only send three board members to future conferences.

Aon’s analysis estimated there would also be an additional $45,000 in one-time costs to move the company to Arizona, including legal costs and the costs of a tax adviser and captive manager. But staying in Hawaii would cost about the same, Shanley told the board in the Oct. 10 meeting. That’s because the agency needed to update its operating agreement and make other legal and administrative changes to the insurance company.

Board member Jason Snider pledged his support for Arizona at the time, saying he was swayed by the fact that there would be similar one-time costs no matter what.

“For me, the decision becomes much easier when I realize we were likely going to have to redo a bunch of work in Hawaii anyway,” Snider said. “I think the right decision, given that, is to make the move to Arizona.”

However, Clean Water Services declined to provide a breakdown of the one-time costs of keeping the insurance company in Hawaii to back up its assertion. Clean Water Services sought a legal review of costs for staying in Hawaii, Cortez said, and she argued that makes the “legal advice related to potential additional costs” subject to attorney-client privilege.

Leaders from Clean Water Services began traveling to the Hawaii Captive Insurance Council forum in 2016, after the agency decided to form and incorporate its captive insurance company in Hawaii. States that offer the niche insurance programs often tout their locations and amenities, with Hawaii boasting about its “world class business meeting, hospitality, and recreational facilities fostering productive business meetings and corporate retreats.”

The sewer agency has defended its decision as financially beneficial to its ratepayers. Since 2016, the insurance company’s capital has grown to almost $5.55 million that could be applied to future catastrophic insurance events, exceeding expectations consultants set in 2015 when the agency was considering forming the company, records show.

But the case for basing the insurance company in Hawaii was always more opaque, consultants’ evaluations obtained by the newsroom through Oregon’s public records law show.

In fact, the records show that consultants in 2014 initially recommended that officials consider locating the business in Arizona or Utah before eventually recommending Hawaii, which they touted in part based on the faulty premise that travel costs wouldn’t be expensive. And a 2022 evaluation conducted by Aon shows that Hawaii continued to rank highest partly because of the insurance company’s history there, an advantage no other state could offer.

When Aon conducted its updated review this summer that found Arizona was the best location, it did so by using a slimmed-down matrix that no longer benefited Hawaii by including “substance and existing relationships” as a factor, among other key changes.

Following the board’s vote Tuesday, Clean Water Services will now begin to work through the legal, operational and administrative hurdles necessary to relocate the insurance subsidiary to Arizona. Director Jerry Willey was absent from the vote. The board has given the agency until the end of 2026 to complete that process, but Cortez said the timeline could be shorter.

“As to the timeframe,” Cortez said in an email, “we believe this to be a conservative estimate and will continue to adjust the details of the timeline now that the board has made the decision to re-domesticate in Arizona.”

If you purchase a product or register for an account through a link on our site, we may receive compensation. By using this site, you consent to our User Agreement and agree that your clicks, interactions, and personal information may be collected, recorded, and/or stored by us and social media and other third-party partners in accordance with our Privacy Policy.

Source link

Arizona

Homes for Heroes program announces 4 grant winners

Published

1 day ago

November 19, 2025

Press Room

Homes for Heroes program announces 4 grant winners

PHOENIX — Four organizations were honored with grants from the Homes for Heroes program that assists veterans with transitional housing, health care and more.

The winners of the grants, which total $750,000, were announced by Gov. Katie Hobbs and the Arizona Department of Veterans’ Services on Tuesday.

Three grants for $200,000 were issued to Axiom Community of Recovery, U.S. Vets – Prescott and Esperanza en Escalante.

Scottsdale Recovery Center was awarded a grant for $150,000.

“By creating pathways to housing for our veterans, we are helping them realize the opportunity, security and freedom that underpin the Arizona Promise,” Hobbs said. “Working hand in hand with community organizations, we are committed to realizing our goal of ending veteran homelessness in Arizona.”

“Our veterans have sacrificed so much for our country,” ADVS Director John Scott said. “We owe it to them to ensure they have a safe place to sleep, and the support they need to rebuild their lives. With these new investments, we are taking meaningful steps toward that goal.”

What will the organizations do with the grant money?

Axiom is planning to create 30 new transitional housing beds and provide more detox services for veterans in crisis.

The Scottsdale Recovery Center is also adding transitional housing beds and detox services, in addition to pet boarding.

Services in northern Arizona will increase drastically with the U.S. Vets – Prescott organization providing 100 new housing plans at the Fort Whipple campus set to open in Jan. 2026.

The Tucson-based Esperanza en Escalante will offer 32 veterans emergency housing, detox and pet boarding services in southern Arizona.

The grant program includes $750,000 to help veterans with substance use disorders, mental health conditions and other challenges from military service that increase the risk of homelessness and an additional $500,000 grant to coordinate efforts to reduce homelessness.

In total, $2 million worth of grant financing is dedicated to helping military veterans.

Follow @tomkuebelaz

We want to hear from you.

Have a story idea or tip? Pass it along to the KTAR News team here.

Source link

Arizona

Baylor football expert previews the Arizona game, makes a score prediction

Published

2 days ago

November 18, 2025

Press Room

Baylor football expert previews the Arizona game, makes a score prediction

Another week, another unfamiliar foe for Arizona football. So it goes in a new conference.

Baylor has never been on the UA schedule before, their only meeting coming in the 1992 Sun Bowl, with the Bears winning 20-15. Ironically, the Wildcats could be headed back to El Paso next month based on the latest bowl projections.

The 2025 Bears are 5-5 overall and 3-4 in the Big 12 after losing 55-28 at home to No. 13 Utah. That was their third home loss this season and they’ve also dropped their last two road games.

To better understand Baylor, we reached out to Garrett Ross of 247Sports’ Bears Illustrated for some insight and a score prediction. Below are his vigorous answers to our lethargic questions:

AZ Desert Swarm: Baylor has dropped three of four since a 4-2 start. What has gone wrong lately, and can things be fixed in time to avoid missing out on a bowl?

Garrett Ross: “Everything that could go wrong with a program has gone wrong for Baylor this season. During that stretch, Baylor has fired their offensive line coach due to an incident in practice, the fanbase has completely bailed on head coach Dave Aranda, and AD Mack Rhoades was caught up in an incident with tight end Michael Trigg and a separate scandal that forced him to step down as CFP committee chair and be placed on administrative leave with no likelihood hood of returning. It’s going to be difficult to salvage the season with all of the distractions and uncertainty surrounding the future of the athletic department, but Aranda should be the coach for the remainder of the season.”

Sawyer Robertson leads the Big 12 in passing, both in yards and touchdowns. The Bears also have the league’s leading receiver in Josh Cameron and three other guys with at least 500 yards. How do you think they will try to exploit one of the top pass defenses in the country?

“Baylor’s offense is the most effective when they get Michael Trigg involved early and often. TCU and Utah did an excellent job of eliminating Trigg and making the Bears rely on their other targets to carry the load. Josh Cameron is really good, but he’s not the type of player who can completely take over a game. Ashtyn Hawkins will be unavailable for the first half following a fight against Utah where he was ejected. Kobe Prentice didn’t play last week, but he’s a walking touchdown, while Kole Wilson can be effective when he’s focused.

“If Baylor has any hope of upsetting Arizona, they have to get the ball to Trigg.”

The most effective teams against Arizona are the ones who can run the ball, particularly with the quarterback being involved. Is Baylor’s run game good enough to keep the Wildcats honest?

“Baylor’s rushing attack has been limited with injuries and constantly having to play from behind. Bryson Washington looked like he was set for a breakout game against Utah, but the Bears got behind and abandoned the run. Sawyer Robertson will run if needed, but he prefers to be a pocket passer. Freshman duo Caden Knighten and Michael Turner have proven that they can make plays when needed, but Knighten has just one 100-yard game this season.

Utah ran for 380 yards last week and all but one Big 12 opponents has scored at least 27 points. What has caused Baylor’s defense to struggle so much?

“It’s honestly a lack of talent and execution when needed. The defensive line is weak and struggles to create any pressure, while getting bullied by opposing offensive lines. Outside of Keaton Thomas, the linebackers are irrelevant.

“The secondary has a history of getting burnt and their most effective player is former walk-on Jacob Redding. Two of Baylor’s best players (Redding, Josh Cameron) are former walk-ons, you can’t compete for championships like that, especially in the transfer portal and NIL era.”

Dave Aranda’s name has been mentioned on plenty of ‘hot seat’ lists, and there’s a possibility of a third losing season in the last four. What does the fanbase think of him, and do you think his job is on the line these last few weeks?

“The fans have been out on Aranda for a couple of seasons now, but it’s officially over at this point. He’s made multiple staff changes and adjustments to his approach, but it’s just not working. Aranda is a tremendous person and the team absolutely loves him, but it’s a billion-dollar entertainment business now, and nothing is entertaining about Baylor football. I personally believe he finishes out the season and rides off into the sunset with a nice check.”

Prediction time. Does Baylor become bowl eligible and spoil Arizona’s Senior Day or do the Wildcats stay hot and win their fourth straight? Give us a score pick.

“I think Baylor makes it interesting for about a half, but Arizona finds a way to run all over the Bears and capitalize on a couple of turnovers while winning 42-31.”

Source link